Dream Chaser: Free Flight Successful, but the Landing...

[Mr Shifty]

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/10/dream-chaser-landing-failure-first-flight/

http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n1310/26dreamchaser/#.Umyh0-1DtpA

UPDATE 10/29/2013: And now video! Cuts off before the crash, but you can clearly see the left landing gear fail to deploy, though the landing looks phenomenal otherwise.

Space News got an interview with Mark Sirangelo:

http://www.spacenews.com/article/launch-report/37903snc-mission-accomplished-in-dream-chaser-test-despite-crash-landing

Edited October 29, 2013 by Mr Shifty

[mdatspace]

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/10/dream-chaser-landing-failure-first-flight/

http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n1310/26dreamchaser/#.Umyh0-1DtpA

I can't even land a plane without a decent explosion in this game.

[Tiberion]

Well that is unfortunate.

Worth noting (from the article) that the Test Article didn't have the actual final landing gear, so it shouldn't be a design flaw 'back to the drawing board' issue. Here's hoping they can keep their testing schedule on track, because I have a feeling the race to win one of the contracts is going to be a tight one.

[AlamoVampire]

I think it that, given that it behaved in flight, and was not using final design spec landing gear, it did quite well. It stayed on the designed flight and glide slope, landed smoothly, cannot ask for more imho.

[jwenting]

Well that is unfortunate.

Worth noting (from the article) that the Test Article didn't have the actual final landing gear, so it shouldn't be a design flaw 'back to the drawing board' issue. Here's hoping they can keep their testing schedule on track, because I have a feeling the race to win one of the contracts is going to be a tight one.

hmm, sounds like they were set up to fail, like the YF-23 which lost the ATF competition from the YF-22 because "it had not shown the ability to fire life weapons" when life firing exercises had not been scheduled for the YF-23 to safe cost by the evaluation board that later used the fact they'd not been performed as the primary reason to choose the YF-22 over it (despite the YF-23 being a superior platform overall).

[Kryten]

Yup, it was set up to fail by the company that actually built it in order to prevent themselves from getting the CCDev contract. Makes perfect sense.

[Scotius]

Doesn't look too bad from what article says. Malfunction of one landing gear is nothing unexpected or anomalous in a prototype. Dream Chaser looks very nice, and i hope it will not cripple the program.

[Mr Shifty]

I'd guess that the biggest problem with the flight is that the ETA might be damaged beyond repair, so no further tests maybe until it can be rebuilt. It sounds like the test was perfectly successful from an engineering standpoint, except that they can't recover and reuse the ETA immediately. Hopefully this doesn't set them back too far.

[Jones-250]

Malfunction of one landing gear is nothing unexpected or anomalous in a prototype.

True, I do belive that this ´setback´ is going to be, in fact, more productive than a perfect success. What if the gears hadn´t failed and the cause would have gone unnoticed? It might have caused much more damage in the future, when the vehicle would have been in full service. Every disaster has a bright side to it, no matter how small it may be.

The future looks bright for this project.

[Kryten]

Except this isn't the flight landing gear. And a setback of a few months in completing the CCDev milestones would lead to them definitely not receiving the contact.

[AlamoVampire]

Yup, it was set up to fail by the company that actually built it in order to prevent themselves from getting the CCDev contract. Makes perfect sense.

nothing but a conspiracy. you lack the proof that would intentionally sabotage themselves. It IS a prototype. failures ARE expected. and an instant defeat to your conspiracy: if they did not/do not want said contract, they would not be competing for it.

[PakledHostage]

You do realize that Kryten was being sarcastic?

[AlamoVampire]

Yes, but i couldnt stop myself, which is why its ordered as it is. If i didnt know ida gone in the other order hehe

[Mr Shifty]

I updated the OP to include just released video footage of the landing:

Plus Mark Sirangelo interview:

http://www.spacenews.com/article/launch-report/37903snc-mission-accomplished-in-dream-chaser-test-despite-crash-landing

“We learned everything we wanted to on this test, and learned more than we expected to learn,†Sirangelo said. “We believe we’ve got most of the data we need [but] I can’t honestly say, I just don’t know yet. It’s not going to affect our schedule in the long term [but] It might affect whether we do another free flight test this year or next year. We’re still assessing that.â€Â

. . .

If another flight is required, “we think the Engineering Test Article is flyable again,†Sirangelo said.

Edited October 29, 2013 by Mr Shifty

[Scotius]

They didn't show the crash. Too horrible to watch?

[Nibb31]

More likely they don't want the bad PR.

[Woopert]

Really excited about the Dream Chaser. The good news is that with the accidents, Sierra Nevada can learn from the flaw with the test and make it even safer, even if the final design for the landing gear wasn't used on this craft. I love Sierra Nevada and wish them good luck. (However in this article, NBC mentions that the landing gear will not be used for the real deal: http://www.nbcnews.com/science/dream-chaser-mini-shuttle-be-fixed-after-first-free-flight-8C11488071).

Edited October 31, 2013 by Woopert